You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.05 AVERAGE
4.05 AVERAGE
My first McCarthy book and everybody undersold it to me somehow. I have never experienced such palpable dread like that before. Such interesting characters and perspectives, with a terrifying villain as the cherry on top.
I love the inevitability of each interaction. From the jump, it feels like you know how everything will play out, but there’s no stopping it. The only person who even understands that is Bell, after years of hopelessly watching his ideal world decay to this state.
To finish, there are so many perfect, quotable sections of this book but this one is my favorite:
“I always thought when I got older that God would sort of come into my life in some way. He didn’t. I don’t blame him. If I was him I’d have the same opinion about me that he does.”
I love the inevitability of each interaction. From the jump, it feels like you know how everything will play out, but there’s no stopping it. The only person who even understands that is Bell, after years of hopelessly watching his ideal world decay to this state.
To finish, there are so many perfect, quotable sections of this book but this one is my favorite:
“I always thought when I got older that God would sort of come into my life in some way. He didn’t. I don’t blame him. If I was him I’d have the same opinion about me that he does.”
This was just straight up fucking excellent. I know that people clown on an overdescribed scene, where you have to slog through as an author elucidates the minutiae and tiny processes of undoing a belt, then yawning, then opening a cupboard, then standing up, then slowly walking towards the window, then opening the latch and then pushing open the window, then sitting down in a nearby chair, then scooting the chair closer to the open window, then yawning, and then opening a can of beer... but the effect is undeniable. It is a true skill to be able to suspend a reader in a series of moments - it gives such pause and weight to a setting, slowing down time to a crawl and yet still keeping you onside. This is skill. This is cinematic, achieved with words a ten year old could read (but shouldn't).
Has any character ever been as scary as Anton Chigurh? And yet - has any character ever been as indelible? That motherfucker makes the word "nightmare" seem ineffective; he's more like a sleep paralysis demon. A spectral embodiment of cosmic indifference like the Angel of Death himself. What kind of fucked-in-the-head harbinger of Revelations wields the capricious whims of fate as a weapon for himself?! He was easily my favourite character. I think he might be almost everyone's - which is a weird feeling for someone you're constantly actively rooting against.
I think this might be the best book I have read in months. I won't go on about that fact - I just encourage you to read it. However, of course, there are a few things worth noting before you jump in.
Even in just the last few years, we've shifted as readers to no longer be tolerant of women in novels being relegated to nothing but tearful women pleading with men, or otherwise purely servile - maids, wives on the sideline, nurses. Many characters also have uncomfortable racial undertones that, while not explicit, send up warning bells for people like me who are used to "The Greats" flying pretty dangerously close to the sun. I don't think McCarthy really thought about it - I would wager this issue is one more of lacunae than dismissals, or even disinterest. That's not to say none of the women or people of colour are well-rounded or strong characters (and of course, the whole text serves as an indictment of macho violence); many of them are - but this is ultimately a story about three cool, scary men with cool, scary guns. I'm just telling you how it is.
If you want to, you can spend a little time under the blistering Texan sun with Bell and his simple internal monologues. He's very much an "Old Man Yells At Cloud" type by the end of it, but that's pretty charming, really. His wandering thoughts somehow serve as a heavy in-world anchor, asking you to think a little deeper about what it is you think you know about good, evil, and both, and neither.
Has any character ever been as scary as Anton Chigurh? And yet - has any character ever been as indelible? That motherfucker makes the word "nightmare" seem ineffective; he's more like a sleep paralysis demon. A spectral embodiment of cosmic indifference like the Angel of Death himself. What kind of fucked-in-the-head harbinger of Revelations wields the capricious whims of fate as a weapon for himself?! He was easily my favourite character. I think he might be almost everyone's - which is a weird feeling for someone you're constantly actively rooting against.
I think this might be the best book I have read in months. I won't go on about that fact - I just encourage you to read it. However, of course, there are a few things worth noting before you jump in.
Even in just the last few years, we've shifted as readers to no longer be tolerant of women in novels being relegated to nothing but tearful women pleading with men, or otherwise purely servile - maids, wives on the sideline, nurses. Many characters also have uncomfortable racial undertones that, while not explicit, send up warning bells for people like me who are used to "The Greats" flying pretty dangerously close to the sun. I don't think McCarthy really thought about it - I would wager this issue is one more of lacunae than dismissals, or even disinterest. That's not to say none of the women or people of colour are well-rounded or strong characters (and of course, the whole text serves as an indictment of macho violence); many of them are - but this is ultimately a story about three cool, scary men with cool, scary guns. I'm just telling you how it is.
If you want to, you can spend a little time under the blistering Texan sun with Bell and his simple internal monologues. He's very much an "Old Man Yells At Cloud" type by the end of it, but that's pretty charming, really. His wandering thoughts somehow serve as a heavy in-world anchor, asking you to think a little deeper about what it is you think you know about good, evil, and both, and neither.
dark
reflective
sad
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
adventurous
dark
emotional
reflective
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
adventurous
dark
mysterious
reflective
sad
tense
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
No Country for Old Men is a book of tense action punctuated by nihilistic philosophy in a well-rendered arid landscape.
However, everything I enjoyed was undercut somehow. The dialect is good and the short writing style should quicken the pace and enhance the book's clarity, but the lack of quotation marks and dialogue attribution causes confusion. Is someone even talking? If so, who? There is wonderful description of place, but there is also lots of clinical description of weaponry. So and so picks up this exact model of gun, checks the clip, etc. etc. It's not Stieg Larsson bad, but it's dull. Also, the most interesting character is killed 2/3 of the way into the book, while the older sheriff is left to ramble on and on and on about being an old sheriff. Maybe this is all intentional, McCarthy's plan to make sure everything in the book is undercut by some sort of nihilism, but if nihilism and hopelessness is the point, the book should be shorter. Although maybe its rambling final 100 pages is intended to undercut the taut suspense of the beginning.
Because of the confusion, I might not have grasped the sheer horror of Anton Chigurh if I hadn't already seen the film when I came out years ago. I liked what Stephen in his review: "The fact that the reader (i.e., a regular person of today) is not as shocked or confused by the actions of people like Anton Chigurh as Sheriff Bell is in the book is a powerful statement about how numb and accepting we have become of brutal, sadistic violence being a part of our everyday lives." Good point. Also, the ending scene is tone-perfect.
I just don't understand the hype and high-acclaim for this book. I understand why some people like it -- I am definitely not in this book's target audience -- but the high average rating here (one of the highest average ratings of any book I've read this year) shows it's almost universally beloved, at a fan-boyish level even. I don't know why. Also, I see so many reviews that talk about how the book has "no commas" or, even more hyperbolic, "no punctuation." These people should read Elements of Style, because there is a comma on almost every page. (I literally just flipped to ten random pages. There is at least one comma on nine of them.) Why are people so hyperbolic about this book? Do they need to inject excitement enthusiasm where there is only dread and disappointment?
However, everything I enjoyed was undercut somehow. The dialect is good and the short writing style should quicken the pace and enhance the book's clarity, but the lack of quotation marks and dialogue attribution causes confusion. Is someone even talking? If so, who? There is wonderful description of place, but there is also lots of clinical description of weaponry. So and so picks up this exact model of gun, checks the clip, etc. etc. It's not Stieg Larsson bad, but it's dull. Also, the most interesting character is killed 2/3 of the way into the book, while the older sheriff is left to ramble on and on and on about being an old sheriff. Maybe this is all intentional, McCarthy's plan to make sure everything in the book is undercut by some sort of nihilism, but if nihilism and hopelessness is the point, the book should be shorter. Although maybe its rambling final 100 pages is intended to undercut the taut suspense of the beginning.
Because of the confusion, I might not have grasped the sheer horror of Anton Chigurh if I hadn't already seen the film when I came out years ago. I liked what Stephen in his review: "The fact that the reader (i.e., a regular person of today) is not as shocked or confused by the actions of people like Anton Chigurh as Sheriff Bell is in the book is a powerful statement about how numb and accepting we have become of brutal, sadistic violence being a part of our everyday lives." Good point. Also, the ending scene is tone-perfect.
I just don't understand the hype and high-acclaim for this book. I understand why some people like it -- I am definitely not in this book's target audience -- but the high average rating here (one of the highest average ratings of any book I've read this year) shows it's almost universally beloved, at a fan-boyish level even. I don't know why. Also, I see so many reviews that talk about how the book has "no commas" or, even more hyperbolic, "no punctuation." These people should read Elements of Style, because there is a comma on almost every page. (I literally just flipped to ten random pages. There is at least one comma on nine of them.) Why are people so hyperbolic about this book? Do they need to inject excitement enthusiasm where there is only dread and disappointment?
"I think sometimes people would rather have a bad answer about things than no answer at all."
This thrilling novel contains some really well written characters, that act apparently pointless on occasions, which makes them even more human. The novel gets right to the point in horrible ways, which I loved, because some dramatic buildup doesn't happen in real life either.
If one likes themes such as drugs and violence, one will love this book. And even if one doesn't, this book is, because of McCarthys writing style, a pretty "enjoyable" read. I preferred this story over "The Road" although I think "The Road" is the better written book. I'ts just more depressing.
This thrilling novel contains some really well written characters, that act apparently pointless on occasions, which makes them even more human. The novel gets right to the point in horrible ways, which I loved, because some dramatic buildup doesn't happen in real life either.
If one likes themes such as drugs and violence, one will love this book. And even if one doesn't, this book is, because of McCarthys writing style, a pretty "enjoyable" read. I preferred this story over "The Road" although I think "The Road" is the better written book. I'ts just more depressing.
I'm not sure what Cormac McCarthy has against the comma, oxford or otherwise, but this specific aversion makes the book difficult not just for the mind numbingly boring story, but also for the formatting. Impressive feats
Cormac writes great stories, simply put. Love the way this one cuts back and forth from the various stories and brings them together at the end. Anton is one bad dude.
(And for the record, the book was better than the movie. Of course.)
(And for the record, the book was better than the movie. Of course.)